Squeezing in hours before the Tuesday deadline, members of Baltimore’s local longshoremen’s unions filed a class-action claim against the owner and manager of the 984-foot cargo ship that destroyed the Francis Scott Key Bridge in March and closed the Port of Baltimore.
The suit brought on by members of the International Longshoremen’s Association Locals 333, 953, and 1429 against Grace Ocean Private Limited and Synergy Marine Group alleges lost wages and career opportunities as a result of the closure, which lasted about two months. According to the lawsuit, nearly six-months after the incident, shipping traffic in Baltimore’s port has not yet returned to pre-collapse levels.
“I would estimate at this time last year, I had approximately 3500 hours. This year I am close to 1500,” said Alonzo Key, a longshoreman of 21 years who is part of the suit.
Longshoremen don’t work a 9-5 type of job on salary, Key explained. A worker has to hit 400 hours just to qualify for union membership along with healthcare and basic benefits. Then they enter into a tiered system that they call “seniority”: work more hours to get the first pick of the best (and best paying) jobs.
The two-month closure has everyone scrambling to play catch-up. Someone like Anthony Wynn, who returned to the profession in January after taking a hiatus, is now back of the line behind hundreds if not thousands of other professionals, to get work.
“I was looking forward to this summer being a summer where I would get as many hours as I could to acquire my seniority. So by not having that opportunity, it's going to be tight,” said Wynn during a Thursday afternoon news conference. He believes he is now unlikely to qualify for the union and benefits by September 30th, the end of the contract year. Next month, he’ll start over at zero.
The suit comes as longshoremen face yet another difficult hurdle. The international longshoremen’s union, which is not a party to the suit, is preparing to strike at ports across the east coast unless a contract can be reached by Tuesday.
“We’re praying that it’s not a strike, but we’ll cross that bridge when we get there — no pun intended,” said Ryan Hale, who has 12 years of experience as a Port of Baltimore longshoreman.
Like other parties who have filed against the Grace Ocean and Synergy Marine, the longshoremen suit cites findings from the National Transportation Safety Board that the ship had electrical and generator issues before it departed from the Port of Baltimore on that night in late March. The claim alleges that the operators knew of these problems beforehand and “sailed their enormous vessel directly towards a major bridge… in wanton and reckless disregard for the safety of others.”
At this point, no parties are seeking an actual dollar amount in damages. The multiple lawsuits are instead challenging Grace Ocean’s bid for limited liability, which would cap the company’s responsibility at around $44 million. The suit follows similar claims from the state of Maryland, Baltimore City and County, the families of six construction workers who were killed in the disaster and numerous private companies
“This is not the lawsuit to recover their wages. This is the answer to the ship saying they were ‘seaworthy’ and these men, along with everyone else at that location are saying, ‘No, you were not seaworthy,’” said William “Billy” Murphy, the attorney representing the longshoremen in the class-action suit.
During a news briefing on Tuesday, Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown acknowledged that the numerous legal proceedings are likely to be lengthy but the court battle shouldn’t affect bridge reconstruction. The Maryland Transportation Authority selected Kiewit Infrastructure Co. to design and build the new bridge, which officials say will reopen in fall of 2028.
